Las excursiones guiadas multilingües en contextos urbanos. Un enfoque basado en reseñas 2.0

Tessa Keymeulen; Patrick Goethals

doi:10.25145/j.pasos.2018.16.033

Authors

Tessa Keymeulen
Patrick Goethals http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1421-562X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25145/j.pasos.2018.16.033

Keywords:

Guided tours;, Multilingualism, 2.0 reviews, Linguistic commodification.

Abstract

In this research note we analyze a multilingual corpus of 2.0 reviews about a guided tour in an urban context. Using a content analysis approach we investigate the attitudes of tourists towards the services that are delivered by the guides and towards its multilingual dimension in particular. We conclude that there exist subtle differences in the way that the guiding service is described and evaluated, and that tourists also adopt divergente attitudes towards multilingualism according to the language that they use in their review. Moreover, we find that an explicit reference to the guided character of the tour is not associated with a more positive evaluation, and that travellers repeatedly criticize the way in which multilingualism is ‘commodified’. In general, this study aims to shed light on the heuristic parameters for investigating an under-studied phenomenon, namely multilingualism in tourism context, and for using more intensively 2.0 data.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alegre, J., y Garau, J. 2010. Tourist satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Annals of tourism research, 37(1), 52-73 [DOI: 10.1016/j. annals.2009.07.001]

Blue, G. M., y Harun, M. 2003. Hospitality language as a professional skill. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 73-91 [DOI: 10.1016/ S0889-4906(01)00031-X]

Buzova, D., Sanz-Blas, S., y Cervera-Taulet, A. 2016. Cross-cultural Perceptions of Onshore Guided Tours: A Qualitative Approach Based on eWOM. Psychology y Marketing, 33(12), 1054-1061. [DOI: 10.1002/mar.20939]

Cohen, E., y Cooper, R. R. 1986. Language and Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 13(4), 533-563.

Cronin, M. 2000. Across the Lines. Travel, Language, Translation. Cork: Cork University.

Dann, G. 2012. Remodelling a changing language of tourism: from monologue to dialogue and trialogue. Pasos. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 10(4), 59-72. [URL: http://www.pasosonline.org/ Publicados/10412special/PS0412_07.pdf]

Goethals, P. 2016. Language and international tourism: a content- and discourse-based approach to language-related judgments in web 2.0 hotel reviews. Language and Intercultural Communication, 16(2), 235-253.

Hale, S. 2016. User Reviews and Language: How Language Influences Ratings Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1208-1214): ACM. [DOI: 10.1145/2851581.2892466]

Heller, M., Pujolar, J., y Duchêne, A. 2014. Linguistic commodification in tourism. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(4), 539-566. [DOI: 10.1111/ josl.12082]

Leclerc, D., y Martin, J. N. 2004. Tour guide communication competence: French, German and American tourists’ perceptions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28, 181-200. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2004.06.006]

Lu, W., y Stepchenkova, S. 2015. User-Generated Content as a Research Mode in Tourism and Hospitality Applications: Topics, Methods, and Software. Journal of Hospitality Marketing y Management, 24(2), 119-154. [DOI: 10.1080/19368623.2014.907758]

Weiler, B., y Davis, D. 1993. An exploratory investigation into the roles of the nature-based tour leader. Tourism Management, 14(2), 91-98. [DOI: 10.1016/0261-5177(93)90041-I]

Weiler, B., y Black, R. 2015. Tour Guiding Research: Insights, Issues and Implications (pp. 45-70): Channel View Publications.

Wozniak, S. 2010. Language needs analysis from a perspective of international professional mobility: The case of French mountain guides. English for Specific Purposes, 29, 143-152. [DOI: 10.1016/j.esp.2010.06.001]